[Dnsmasq-discuss] Extend server to accept hostnames for upstream resolver

[Geert Stappers]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 12:24:15PM +0100, Simon Kelley wrote:
> This seems like a sensible idea, but it does need a clear warning in the
> documentation that it will only work if the dnsmasq instance being
> configured is not the one providing DNS to the local system.

And the idea did trigger further idea.

Manual page has
  -S, --local, --server=[/[<domain>]/[domain/]][<ipaddr>[#<port>]][@<interface>][@<source-ip>[#<port>]]


( I think the mailing archive has a request for 
  -S, --local, --server=[/[<domain>]/[domain/]]<ipaddr>[#<port>]][@<interface>][@<source-ip>[#<port>]
so that <ipaddr> is mandatory. )

Making that
  -S, --local, --server=[/[<domain>]/[domain/]]<upstreamserver>[#<port>]][@<interface>][@<source-ip>[#<port>]
where <upstreamerserver> can be an IP-address or servername.
When it is a servername is nameresolving started for servername.
Succesfull name resolving allow dnsmasq to do its task, failed name
resolving yields a fatal error.

The "name resolving"  is gethostbyname function or other function that
works for the (container) environment that started this request / idea.
I imagine that gethostbyname()  name resolving also reads /etc/hosts,
so more "environment" can benefit from this new feature.



Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Silence is hard to parse